Does Jalopnik do this on purpose?

"BKosher84" (bkosher84) 01/27/2016 at 09:17 • Filed to: None

1

38

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Do they intentionally cross-post all of Alissa Walker’s stupid Gizmodo articles to get people riled up?

Berang > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 09:25

17

Whether one agrees with the ideas or not, they’re car related, they’re interesting, and they will probably have an impact on you in the future.

People who complain about them come across as asking for a “safe space” for car enthusiasts. While I find some of the ideas in them annoying, I don’t find the articles or their presence on Jalopnik annoying.

Rico > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 09:34

0

Yes, but they don’t have a choice.

Autohaus Derp > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 09:34

3

Gotta get those sweet, sweet clicks!

Wacko > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 09:35

0

As long as they keep oppo safe, I won’t complain.

Also last week they did envade oppo, for about 2 min, then when I refreshed the page it went away.

TractorPillow > Berang 01/27/2016 at 09:41

0

Well said.

Birddog > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 09:45

0

Yes.

They have to pay the bills. And if those idiotic posts do the trick so be it.

Just say no. Scroll past to something good.

McMike > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 09:47

2

While infrastructure planning is a decent discussion to have, posting a story that has a anti-car/driving bias to an automotive enthusiast website is trolling.

What If someone cross-posted a Bill Cosby rape story to Jezebel that hinted on victim blaming?

I think the bigger problem here are Sploid crossposts. At least Alissa can come up with more than three sentences.

Zip-McBump > Autohaus Derp 01/27/2016 at 09:48

1

“Everyone who drives is a fat, racist, Climate Change-denying Republican fascist!!!”

There. I just saved everyone the trouble of reading the comments.

Boter > Berang 01/27/2016 at 09:49

1

Agreed - it’s nice seeing them, though I’d like a response from a Jalopnik staff writer. It’s an important topic! I just want to hear from a car enthusiast, not an NYCer who doesn’t realize that most of the country can’t rely on public transportation.

Dsscats > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 09:57

1

I wouldn’t be frustrated about it if her articles were even mildly well thought out or researched

jariten1781 > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 10:03

1

I have no issues with the stories being cross-posted...I’ll click them if I want a humorous read through or ignore them otherwise.

I do not understand why, editorially, they’d just direct post them though. The platform is set up where they can write their own intro paragraph. When they’re directly posted as they do now it seems like an endorsement of the content which I don't think is their intention. A quick lead-in would clarify that it's a cross-post to a blog which is not in their editorial envelope and perhaps point out a couple of the big swingers where they believe she is off base. Doesn't need to be a counter-point by counter-point take down or anything.

Berang > Boter 01/27/2016 at 10:04

2

I don’t think the articles are suggesting everybody everywhere does have to rely on public transport. Just pointing out that in many places, there would be workable alternatives to private cars, if we’d just give them a real chance instead of lip service. This point isn’t repeated in every article, but it has been addressed (kind of) in a couple of them.

Santiago of Escuderia Boricua > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 10:24

1

We might disagree with them, but it’s fine to hear them out

Urambo Tauro > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 10:31

0

Maybe instead of writing a rebuttal, this is Jalopnik’s way of “throwing her to the wolves”. Let the commenters handle it.

tromoly > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 10:32

0

Justin T. Westbrook > jariten1781 01/27/2016 at 10:37

2

The platform isn’t set up like this anymore. It’s direct post or nill.

Also it looks bad to share an article form a co-worker and immediately claim they are off base. We wouldn’t do it even if we could.

It’s information that fits the blog, whether or not you like the voice.

Justin T. Westbrook > McMike 01/27/2016 at 10:39

0

Except cars isn’t rape, jack ass.

jariten1781 > Justin T. Westbrook 01/27/2016 at 10:53

2

Fair enough, didn’t know that capability was gone...seems a shame.

Disagree with the second point. It was not uncommon in the print age to have differing voices in the same pub directly contradict each other by name, sometimes violently, sometimes to the point you wondered if the authors legitimately hated each other or were playing it up. It made the entire property stronger IMO, but I suppose that’s moot if that’s the way y’all are going. No biggie, like seriously it's not a big deal to me at all.

I suppose we won't be seeing stuff like 'Ban Eating' anymore that means. Too bad, that shit was gold.

McMike > Justin T. Westbrook 01/27/2016 at 11:10

3

Except cars isn’t rape, jack ass.

It’s OK to dislike my example without the name-calling*, Justin.

*I realize “jack ass” is really, really low on the insult scale, but we try to be nice to each other in Oppo.

Stef Schrader > Boter 01/27/2016 at 11:14

7

Heh, I actually responded to the last one—in the comments, though. But hey, at least they’re thinking about the issue. I agree that we should take better care of our infrastructure and plan things better for demand, however, the either/or approach is not the way to get that done and actually solve any problems. The load of cars on the roads here has outpaced the building of roads, and it’s miserable. Yes, we also need public transit and other means of getting around—but we’ve got to play catch-up on road building in the areas where people need to drive, too.

Berang’s right on the money, though. Too many auto blogs are an echo chamber of self-affirming sameness. Commuting sucks, but it’s an important topic, and I’m glad we’re featuring a voice besides “This Lamborghini Is Pretty Cool*.” It’s worth thinking about those issues, too, as I’d rather spend less time getting places and more time driving in squiggly amoeba-shaped circles for fun.

Most of all, if you’ve got a well-reasoned counterpoint you’d want to see FP’d, write it! I’m knee-deep in drives and Daytona stuff, plus my “commute” is all of a ten-block lunch run to grab coffee in my own neighborhood, so admittedly, I don’t think about the urbanism issues Giz often has the time to write on as much. We still share from Oppo frequently, so there’s that, too.

*I read those, too, though...because Lambos are cool.

wiffleballtony > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 11:16

0

That’s my only explanation.

wiffleballtony > Berang 01/27/2016 at 11:19

0

Except when she posted an article entitled, Ban Cars. Pretty unequivocal.

Berang > wiffleballtony 01/27/2016 at 11:19

0

Did you read the article? Something tells me you didn’t.

For Sweden > BKosher84 01/27/2016 at 11:22

4

Two reasons

A diversity of opinions is healthy

It’s bait

wiffleballtony > Berang 01/27/2016 at 11:23

0

Yes, yes I did.

Berang > wiffleballtony 01/27/2016 at 11:31

1

“ Car bans are as simple as they sound: They restrict private automobiles from entering a city. ... So we start the ban there, in the biggest cities: Where about half the world’s population lives now, where car ownership is already low, and where existing housing density and transit infrastructure allow people to easily live without automobiles. These are also the places you can make the greatest impact as the population in cities is growing—70 percent of the world will live in a city by 2050, as part of multiple urbanizing trends around the world. ”

You must’ve missed the key part of the article where she explains how “banning cars” doesn’t mean banning all cars everywhere all the time . Which seems to be the way most people whining about the articles are taking them. ¯\_()_/¯

Complaining about articles one didn’t read is as stupid as when one complains about a movie they didn’t see offending them.

wiffleballtony > Berang 01/27/2016 at 11:41

0

Except she says “start” in the cities. Which implies that we should ban them elsewhere later on.

Berang > wiffleballtony 01/27/2016 at 11:54

0

And yet - you can get to the last word of that article without any mention of all cars being banned everywhere.

wiffleballtony > Berang 01/27/2016 at 12:18

0

Just because the author didn’t flush out every detail of a total car ban in the article doesn’t remove the clear intent that was set forth at the outset. Understanding the nuances of the vocabulary used in the part you even quoted is very clear. If you were at a restaurant and the waiter asked what you wanted to start with, would you assume that was the only food that would be ordered that evening?

Berang > wiffleballtony 01/27/2016 at 12:22

0

I’m not that paranoid. “Ban Cars” is clickbait. “Ban Some Cars” or “Car Bans” doesn’t have a sensationalist ring. Seems simple to me.

wiffleballtony > Berang 01/27/2016 at 12:27

0

Then why didn’t she say “only” instead of “start”? They have different meanings. Seems like you choose to interpret what she wrote in a way that is counter to what was wrote.

Berang > wiffleballtony 01/27/2016 at 12:34

0

Because maybe, in 500 years all cars may be banned? Or did you pick up on a definite timeline somewhere in there?

In any event, my panties are not twisted.

wiffleballtony > Berang 01/27/2016 at 12:39

0

I’m glad your panties aren’t twisted. However, I can understand why other people’s are.

Berang > wiffleballtony 01/27/2016 at 12:45

1

I dunno. It’s sort of like being mad that somebody reported on the development of seatbelts or unleaded gas. It’s not as though she is the one developing them. And whether or not I feel these efforts are misguided, at least I know what’s going on.

Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo > Zip-McBump 01/27/2016 at 23:34

0

Damn, and I had so much to look forward to!

Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo > For Sweden 01/27/2016 at 23:36

1

Also, I learned that no life exists outside of major cities, apparently.

Burn-Spaz1966-Burn > Justin T. Westbrook 01/28/2016 at 11:04

0

He just chose something that would be sure to hit people in the feels. Plus:

There is no filter on the internet, we use the,”Voice inside our Heads” here.

Like have several comments I could voice right now but realize that I not in the service anymore. So no Barracks mouth.

McMike ? What color wig did you wear causing Bill Cosby to,”Pack your Lunch?”

Burn-Spaz1966-Burn > Burn-Spaz1966-Burn 01/28/2016 at 11:05

0

Your comment wasn’t nice to women. So your in violation too of rule #1